theflatline:My point is all cultures have gross foods and it is not a racial slur to point them out.

Besides, the purpose of that scene is to put Willie Scott through hell, not to point and say "Ha! Ha! Look at all the gross shiat Indian eat. Aren't they disgusting?" Remember that Pankot Palace was a front for the resurrection of a long dormant cult that involved child slavery and human sacrifice. It would make sense that they eat weird shiat.

theflatline:Fano: gunga galunga: Mugato: gunga galunga: And since they mentioned Spielberg and Crystal Skull, they could have also included that Spielberg said he meant Last Crusade to be an apology for Temple of Doom.

Which is bullshiat, since ToD is at least as good as Last Crusade. ToD had that screeching wife of his and that dinner scene but Last Crusade was way too slapstick-y. Sallah and Marcus were drunken idiots and Indy kept falling down and making goofy faces. Raiders Indy, out of embarrassment, would have shot Last Crusade Indy like he was an A-rab brandishing a scimitar

What was wrong with the dinner scene in ToD?

And as far as Last Crusade goes, I would also throw in Indy pretending to be a Scottish interior decorator to infiltrate a Nazi stronghold. That was for me, the low point in the entire franchise until Plinkett's review of Crystal Skull convinced me that the quicksand scene was worse.

Well, the dinner scene is just a gross out sequence. My Indian fiance has never hinted that any item on the menu was ever eaten. Then again, Hollywood seemed to have the idea that Asians consider chilled monkey brains a delicacy, based on what I'll never know.

Because Asians actually do eat monkey brains. Whether they are chilled or not, they are eaten because it is another way for Asians to get boners. While food stuffs are cultural and should be treated as such, Asians do chow down on some bizarre stuff. You can dig around on the internet and there are articles written on the meal showing that the majority of the foodstuffs are based on fact from various cultures.

Also if your fiance was born and raised in the states(or been here most of her life), she might have no idea of some of the food that her people eat.

I am a US born Colombian, but I periodically got and live in Colombia for years at a time, and I was suprised I knew more about Colombian "delicacies" than Colombian friends in the states.

hormigas culonas - Big ass ants(literal translation) they soak them in saltwater and bake them. They say they taste like peanuts. I have never eaten them.

Cuy - guinea pig

Lobanillo - which means tumor, they collect tumors that grow on cattle and fry them.

My point is all cultures have gross foods and it is not a racial slur to point them out.

No, actually from south India. Mostly vegetarian. But I'm pretty sure snake surprise, with wiggly tiny snakes inside a giant anaconda, is not and never was a part of Indian cuisine. Well, maybe those punks in Rajasthan.

My mention of monkey brains was from thinking about the mention in Clue as well. Granted, traditional Chinese is the Noah's Ark of cuisine: two of every animal that ever walked, crawled or flew across God's Green Earth.

Mugato:movieman_1979: List fails without Russell Mulcahy apologizing for 'Highlander II: The Quickening'...at the premiere...in front of the crowd in attendance...before walking out 15 minutes into the film..yeah

Supposedly the director's cut is infinitely better. I'll take their word for it.

The Renegade cut is supposedly the one to see. There are at least 3 major edits on this film. The one I finally watched didn't mention space or aliens at all (although we did see the space ship in one scene).

trickymoo:Pretty sure that David Spade walked out of the theater during the premier of "Joe Dirt" and apologized profusely as he was getting in his limo to escape.

I remember reading about that.

Huh, guess I'm in the minority that I liked Joe Dirt. I knew it was stupid going into it, and it didn't disappoint. I mean what did people expect from a comedy about the white trashiest guy ever dreamed of? Also, sweet baby Jesus Brittany Daniel was smoking hot in that movie.

What the hell are you talking about? Those were awesome 80's action flicks! Well awesome in that cheesy turn your brain off fun action movie way.

Highlander didn't have nearly the amount of action, but the concept was cool, and the soundtrack kicked ass.

Agreed. Queen + Michael Kamen = epic awesomeness. Plus, you've got Sean Connery playing an Egyptian with a Spanish name, and Scottish brogue all while wearing a peacock's feathers and someone's drapes. Lambert is hit or miss (he always was though, if we're being honest), but I still maintain that Highlander is a great concept with so so execution. It's an idea I dare say may even be improved upon with a reboot. Which is not something I say often.

movieman_1979:Agreed. Queen + Michael Kamen = epic awesomeness. Plus, you've got Sean Connery playing an Egyptian with a Spanish name, and Scottish brogue all while wearing a peacock's feathers and someone's drapes. Lambert is hit or miss (he always was though, if we're being honest), but I still maintain that Highlander is a great concept with so so execution. It's an idea I dare say may even be improved upon with a reboot. Which is not something I say often.

It actually had some pretty good cinematography, especially the transitions from the past to the present. But Christopher Lambert was a terrible actor and the love interest was kind of a skank.

t3knomanser:movieman_1979: I like to look at the Highlander series as sort of the "Let's Make A Deal" of movie franchises

Divorced of nostalgia, I have to be honest: Highlander is nearly unwatchable. The soundtrack is great. Watching Clancy Brown chew scenery is cool. Everything else is just awful. The fight sequences are poorly directed. The plot is an incoherent mess, with a shoe-horned in romance subplot that makes absolutely no sense.

It's good with the RiffTrax, but it's still too damn long.

What? You don't think women get turned on by watching guys impale themselves on dirks? That chicks just don't dig blood and guts? That Brenda was a farking freak.

kanesays:Unlike the rest of the individuals on this list, Halle Berry did not apologize for Catwoman. She blamed Warner Brothers."I want to thank Warner Bros. Thank you for putting me in a piece of s---, god awful movie."//Can we retroactively take back her and Cuba Gooding Jr's Oscars?

Eh, Cuba Gooding Jr. can be decent when he wants to. Look at Men of Honor or Radio, I just don't get why his career tanked. Was it that silly movie with the dogs? Halle Berry has always been a bit of a meh actress, but still damned nice to look at.

Richard Dreyfuss has always seemed a little weasely to me for this reason. He only took his role as Hooper in Jaws because he hated the at-the-time unreleased last movie he was in and thought once people saw it he would never work again. Jaws had a notoriously difficult production and the mechanical shark hardly ever worked, so Dreyfuss was in the press bashing the movie before it was even released and pretty much throwing Spielberg under the bus. Then it's a huge hit and made his career and suddenly he loved it.

Losac:Richard Dreyfuss has always seemed a little weasely to me for this reason. He only took his role as Hooper in Jaws because he hated the at-the-time unreleased last movie he was in and thought once people saw it he would never work again. Jaws had a notoriously difficult production and the mechanical shark hardly ever worked, so Dreyfuss was in the press bashing the movie before it was even released and pretty much throwing Spielberg under the bus. Then it's a huge hit and made his career and suddenly he loved it.

[citation needed]

I'm a huge connoisseur of Jaws trivia and this is the first I've heard of that.

gunga galunga:Losac: Richard Dreyfuss has always seemed a little weasely to me for this reason. He only took his role as Hooper in Jaws because he hated the at-the-time unreleased last movie he was in and thought once people saw it he would never work again. Jaws had a notoriously difficult production and the mechanical shark hardly ever worked, so Dreyfuss was in the press bashing the movie before it was even released and pretty much throwing Spielberg under the bus. Then it's a huge hit and made his career and suddenly he loved it.

[citation needed]

I'm a huge connoisseur of Jaws trivia and this is the first I've heard of that.

It was in the Jaws Inside Story documentary on the Biography Channel. Dreyfuss tells how he initially turned Spielberg down for the role then called him back and begged for it after he saw his performance in The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz (looked up the name). They also had an old news clip of him bashing Jaws for all of the production problems after filming had wrapped but it hadn't yet been released.

spman:Joel Schumacher give a half hearted apology for Batman and Robin on the commentary track on the DVD. Personally I don't mind the film, I think it works great as a comedy.

This is a great way to look at the movie. Personally, I've never understood why this movie generates so much fun. Schumacher has nothing to apologize for. Of all the Batman movies from 1989 to 1997, it was the most honest about what it was doing and, for that reason, the most fully realized. It's fair to not like what Schumacher did, but it's totally unfair for the internet hivemind to act like it wasn't a legitimate take on Batman. It was. It's not my favorite, either, but I enjoy the movie for what it is - an over the top campfest that isn't supposed to be taken seriously. It's not even close to being one of the worst movies of all-time - in fact, it's a lot of fun if you chill out and take it for what it is. It's a helluva lot more enjoyable to watch than Christopher Nolan's last pretentious snoozefest.

It's also much more honest than either Burton film. I like how those two movies were supposed to be dark and psychological, but they're really villain-of-the-week campfests, too. They're also really shallow. I mean, both movies portray Batman as essentially some crazy guy who murders at will - that's it. That's not psychological, that's just lazy writing. At least Batman & Robin felt like a complete film - Batman and Batman Returns come off like they were written by about a dozen different writers; the plot holes are bursting at the seams.

Temple of Doom is an excellent sequel, if you can get past Kate Capshaw. And anyhow, she's a nightclub dancer, how could she be any less annoying?

Fun fact - Temple was a prequel, not a sequel. And if a movie could ever be overrated and underrated at the same time, TOD would be it, IMHO.

One thing you can say about ToD is that unlike any of the other movie of the franchise, Indiana Jones actually goes through a character arc. He grows as a person, whereas in all the other movies, he is pretty much the same person at the end of the movie as he is at the beginning. At the beginning of ToD, we see that sometime since his youth, he has lost his way (probably around the time he porked the underage daughter of his mentor). He has gone from "it belongs in a museum" to "fortune and glory". As Chatha Lal delights in reminding him, he had already caused trouble and made a bad name for himself in several countries. (Not to mention that in Raiders, Belloq reminds Indy that they are not much different when it came down to it.) At the beginning of the movie, he is willing to trade away a priceless artifact for a diamond. It is his adventures in ToD, most particularly freeing the imprisoned children, the restores him to his original idealistic beliefs, paving the way for Raider which is why I believe Lucas had this movie set before the others.

velvet_fog:Of all the Batman movies from 1989 to 1997, it was the most honest about what it was doing and, for that reason, the most fully realized. It's fair to not like what Schumacher did, but it's totally unfair for the internet hivemind to act like it wasn't a legitimate take on Batman

There's really no way to answer your post in a way where you can't just respond, "Well it's a comic book movie. It's supposed to be campy and cheesy and since it was almost universally reviled, I'm pulling the 'hive mind' card to make you all look like mindless followers". Well, ok. But that's not where the audience's head was at at the time. The comic itself was getting darker with The Dark Knight Returns and the Burton films, although sort of campy themselves, were heading in that darker direction (I really don't know where the plot holes you speak of were). So no one was in the mood for a regression back into the ridiculous camp of the TV show or worse. But they could have still pulled it off if the dialog, action and general script wasn't so over-the-top horrible.

And it didn't help that Batgirl's uncle Alfred made her Batgirl suit. That was just creepy.

gunga galunga:One thing you can say about ToD is that unlike any of the other movie of the franchise, Indiana Jones actually goes through a character arc

Indy goes through a similar arc in Raiders. He finds that Marion is alive and instead of untying her and making a run for it, he ties her back up and goes after the Ark. Then later he threatens to blow up the Ark because all he wants is Marion. He ultimately can't go through with it but it's clear that he cares more for her than the Ark.

But yeah, he's definitely more of a mercenary bastard in ToD, dealing with gangsters for a diamond he clearly doesn't intend to give to the museum, putting a woman and child in jeopardy for fortune and glory and ultimately giving the prize away. Realistically, the events in Shanghai in 1937/38 were the reason to make ToD set in 1935 but it does fit his character arc better that way.

Last Crusade was more about Henry Sr's journey, similar to Indy's in Raiders, as he finds that everything he was looking for in the Grail was right in front of him in his son. Crystal Skull was about Mutt learning to swing with monkeys.

Mugato:Indy goes through a similar arc in Raiders. He finds that Marion is alive and instead of untying her and making a run for it, he ties her back up and goes after the Ark. Then later he threatens to blow up the Ark because all he wants is Marion. He ultimately can't go through with it but it's clear that he cares more for her than the Ark.

To be fair, Indy did have a point that if the Nazis found her missing, they would tear the camp up looking for them.

And I was right about Maximum Overdrive. From the Youtube comment section:

"I'm a writer and I've been listening to the audio book 'On Writing' by Stephen King. He himself says that Maximum overdrive is the worst thing he has ever written/directed and that he was high on cocaine."

gunga galunga:To be fair, Indy did have a point that if the Nazis found her missing, they would tear the camp up looking for them.

Yeah, but did he think their chances of getting away would somehow improve after he got the Ark and then came back for her? For all he knew that wasn't a coat hanger that little sadistic Nazi prick was packing. He left her there to be tortured and maybe killed while he went after the Ark, stop making excuses for him. :p